Perhaps more of the neoluddism of Peter Frase & al. Displacement is neither inevitable nor necessary, and the benefits of displacement are received by the displacers, not the displaced. There exist alternatives, but they often aren't feasible within capitalism. The Luddites were right about their own situation: they did experience hardship as a direct result of new technologies. Yes, society eventually moved on and labor requirements were reduced in that specific sector, but a lot of people suffered in the meantime. In the case of the Luddites whose labor was displaced by machines, it may have been better to reduce working hours first instead of abruptly employing fewer people. In the case of gentrified neighborhoods, it's probably better to increase the available housing, wages, and social services, rather than hike rents and evict.Yeah, but you're taking the Luddite view. Displacement is inevitable and also necessary. It's dwarfed by the benefits.